SOCIAL FUTURING INDEX – REPORT 2020
I. KEY FINDINGS AND HIGHLIGHTS 1. OECD countries’ overall SFI ranking
No Country SFI
1 Q1 Canada 70.0
2 Australia 62.7
3 Norway 61.3
4 Iceland 59.6
5 Denmark 54.9
6 Finland 54.0
7 Estonia 53.4
8 Poland 52.6
8 Hungary 52.6
10 Q2 Sweden 52.0
10 Slovak Republic 52.0
10 New Zealand 52.0
13 Austria 51.3
14 Lithuania 51.0
15 Slovenia 50.7
16 Latvia 50.0
16 Netherlands 50.0
18 Germany 49.9
19 Q3 Ireland 49.1
20 Switzerland 48.7
21 Czech Republic 47.3 22 United States 46.8
23 Luxembourg 46.4
24 Israel 44.7
25 United Kingdom 43.6
26 Belgium 43.5
27 Chile 43.2
28 Q4 Greece 42.8
29 France 41.6
30 Korea 41.1
31 Italy 40.8
32 Turkey 40.7
33 Spain 39.8
34 Portugal 38.5
35 Japan 38.1
36 Mexico 35.6
Figure 6:
OECD countries’ overall SFI ranking
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 100.0
Canada Peace & Security Attachment Care Balance
Analysis of OECD countries’ overall SFI ranking shows that the top three countries are Canada, Australia, and Norway, while the bottom three are Portugal, Japan, and Mexico. As for the range of the SFI, the maximum achievable score is 100 points, out of which the top country (Canada) scores 70 points, while the bottom country (Mexico) achieves 35.6 points. This range of values shows that there are significant differences between leading and lagging countries. There are instances, however, when only marginal differences can be seen between countries (allowing for the possibility of draws due to equal scores).
For easier comparison, we ranked the countries into four quartiles (Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4) based on their level of social futuring. The most futurable countries belong to the first quartile (Q1), the less futurable ones to the second (Q2), even less futurable ones to the third (Q3), and the least futurable ones to the fourth (Q4). In other words, countries in Q4 have the most work to do if they wish to improve their futurability, and these burdens gradually decrease as we approach the countries in Q1.
Considering the countries in Group Q1, the score between the first (Canada) and the eighth (Poland and Hungary are tied) ranges from 70 to 52.6 points. Besides Canada and Australia, Group Q1 is made up of almost all of the Scandinavian countries (Norway, Iceland, Denmark, Finland, excluding Sweden), as well as some East-Central European countries (such as Estonia, Poland, and Hungary). Within Group Q1, Canada – with its score of 70 – leads the field by far, while the country grouping that follows – made up of Australia, Norway, and Iceland – score between 60 and 63, with the rest of the countries in Group Q1 scoring between 53-55.
As for country Group Q2, a much smaller range of overall scores (between 50 and 52) can be observed. The frontrunners of this group are Sweden, the Slovak Republic, and New Zealand in a triple tie (with scores of 52).
The group ends with Latvia, the Netherlands, and Germany (with scores close to 50). Austria, Lithuania, and Slovenia are situated between the two poles. Within Group Q2 one can find mostly East-Central European
38
The SFI scores of Group Q3 countries range more widely (between 43 and 49). The two frontrunners in this group are Ireland and Switzerland (with scores close to 49), while the countries finishing last within the group are Belgium and Chile (with scores close to 43). As far as the composition of Group Q3 is concerned, besides the one East-Central European country (the Czech Republic) and three non-European countries (USA, Israel and Chile), the group is comprised of mostly Western-European countries (Ireland, Switzerland, Luxembourg, United Kingdom, and Belgium).
Regarding Group Q4, a relatively wide range of scores is visible (between 36-43). Greece and France are the two leaders of the group (with scores of around 42), with Mexico coming in last, scoring 35.6.
The frontrunner countries are followed by a subgroup of countries with scores of 40-41, namely Korea, Italy, Turkey, and Spain. Just in front of the last country (Mexico), two countries (Portugal and Japan) with scores of 38 can be found.
In order to gain deeper understanding of the OECD countries’ overall SFI ranking, we have to consider the country rankings based on each of the four normative standards, the backbone of the SFI.
I.2. Rankings of the OECD countries by normative standards I.2.1. Peace & Security
No Country SFI
1 Q1 Canada 32.2
2 Australia 30.8
3 Iceland 29.3
4 Norway 28.1
5 Estonia 25.8
6 Latvia 23.8
7 New Zealand 23.7
8 Finland 22.6
9 Sweden 21.0
10 Q2 Lithuania 20.6
11 Hungary 19.2
12 United States 18.9
13 Denmark 18.7
14 Czech Republic 16.3
15 Netherlands 16.1
15 Korea 16.1
17 Poland 16.0
18 Ireland 15.9
19 Q3 Slovenia 15.7 20 Slovak Republic 15.6
21 Switzerland 15.3
22 Chile 15.0
23 Austria 14.9
24 France 14.7
25 Germany 13.9
26 Greece 13.7
27 United Kingdom 13.5
28 Q4 Japan 13.4
29 Israel 12.3
30 Turkey 12.2
31 Spain 11.6
32 Portugal 10.7
33 Italy 10.6
34 Luxembourg 10.2
35 Mexico 9.9
36 Belgium 8.2
Figure 7:
40
The normative standard entitled Peace & Security is the most fundamental element of the Social Futuring Index, considering that it provides the substance of a good life in a unity of order in different senses. Its importance is reflected in its 40% weight in the SFI, and it involves both the internal and the external aspects of safety, the latter which can be secured for a given country by either creating it themselves, or by having membership in a military alliance system. In order to conceptualize and measure the level of Peace & Security, we identified the following three dimensions: Defense & Safety, Assets, and Functionality.
As a result, out of the 40 points achievable, Canada, Australia, and Iceland – the top three countries – obtained 32.2, 30.8, and 29.3 points respectively. The lowest scores belong to Luxembourg, Mexico, and Belgium, which achieved 10.2, 9.9, and 8.2 points respectively. Countries obtaining at least 20 points may be regarded as the safest in terms of the different aspects of the Peace & Security normative standard. These are the countries that belong to Group Q1, plus Lithuania from Group Q2.
The performance of countries achieving at least 15 points (belonging to Group Q2 and the first four places in Group Q3) can be regarded as basically satisfying. The rest of the countries can be expected to make a special effort to improve their diverse – internal and external – Peace
& Security capacities to provide firm foundations for developing their social futuring in the long term.
I.2.2. Attachment
No Country SFI
1 Q1 Poland 20.7
2 Slovak Republic 20.6
3 Canada 20.3
4 Luxembourg 20.2
5 Belgium 19.3
6 Austria 18.7
6 Italy 18.7
8 Greece 18.4
9 Turkey 18.0
9 Slovenia 18.0
11 Q2 Hungary 17.8
12 Denmark 17.7
13 Germany 17.2
14 Spain 16.6
15 Chile 16.4
15 Netherlands 16.4
17 Ireland 16.3
18 Israel 16.2
19 Q3 Sweden 15.5
20 Australia 15.3
20 Lithuania 15.3
22 Mexico 14.8
23 Finland 14.5
24 Norway 14.1
25 United States 14.0
25 Switzerland 14.0
27 United Kingdom 13.2
27 Estonia 13.2
29 Q4 Czech Republic 13.0
30 Latvia 12.7
31 Portugal 12.6
32 France 11.8
33 Iceland 11.6
34 New Zealand 10.7
35 Korea 9.9
36 Japan 7.7
Figure 8:
Rankings of OECD countries based on the
”Attachment” normative standard
0.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 30.0
42
The normative standard entitled Attachment is also a crucial element of the Social Futuring Index, since it is essential for healthy bodily, mental, intellectual and spiritual human development. Its importance is reflected in its 30% weight in constructing the SFI, and it involves aspects of real-life and transcendental belonging to smaller and larger communities, such as primary, national, religious and other social groups. In order to conceptualize and measure its level, we identified the following three dimensions: Patriotism, Family, and Spirituality.
As a result, out of the maximum achievable score of 30, Poland, the Slovak Republic, and Canada – the top three countries – obtained scores of 20.7, 20.6, and 20.3, respectively. The lowest scores belong to New Zealand, Korea, and Japan, which achieved scores of 10.7, 9.9, and 7.7, respectively. The first twelve countries obtained close to 18 points or over, including the countries of Group Q1 and three others from Group Q2. Based on their results we may consider these countries the most cohesive and integrated ones in terms of the different mechanisms of Attachment. The performance of countries achieving at least (rounded) 13 points (belonging to Groups Q2, Q3 and the first four places in Group Q4) can be regarded as basically satisfying:
however, there is significant room for further improvement in their cases. Countries occupying the last five positions can be expected to make a special effort to improve the performance of their citizens in terms of their belonging to diverse communities.
I.2.3. Care
No Country SFI
1 Q1 Switzerland 14.8
2 Iceland 14.6
3 Germany 13.5
4 Denmark 13.0
5 Norway 12.9
6 United Kingdom 12.8 7 Czech Republic 12.4
8 Japan 12.3
9 Austria 12.2
10 Q2 New Zealand 12.1
10 Australia 12.1
12 Canada 11.9
12 Finland 11.9
14 Ireland 11.8
14 Netherlands 11.8
16 Luxembourg 11.3
17 Slovenia 11.2
18 United States 11.1
19 Q3 Sweden 11.0
20 Belgium 10.9
21 Israel 10.6
22 Poland 10.1
22 Korea 10.1
24 France 9.8
25 Slovak Republic 9.3
26 Hungary 9.0
27 Estonia 8.9
28 Q4 Lithuania 8.8
29 Portugal 8.7
30 Italy 7.5
31 Latvia 7.3
32 Chile 7.0
33 Spain 6.9
34 Mexico 6.5
35 Greece 6.2
36 Turkey 5.1
Figure 9:
Rankings of OECD countries based on the ”Care” normative standard
0.0 4.0 8.0 12.0 16.0
44
The normative standard entitled Care (Material Advancement and Freedom) covers the abilities of self-reliance and self-determination to actualize one’s potential and capacity to control one’s own fate. Its relevance is reflected in its 20% weight in constructing the SFI, and it involves aspects of human capital, labor, child poverty, household expenditure, GDP and life prospects. In order to make it measurable, we defined two dimensions: Self-reliance and Material advancement.
In terms of the ranking based on this normative standard, out of the achievable 20 points Switzerland, Iceland, and Germany – the top three countries – obtained scores of 14.8, 14.6, and 13.5 respectively. The lowest scores belong to Mexico, Greece, and Turkey, which received 6.5, 6.2, and 5.1 scores respectively. The first fifteen countries obtained close to 12 points or more, including the countries of Group Q1 and six others from Group Q2. According to their measured performance, these countries can be considered the most materially developed states, which enables them to provide the highest level of Care for themselves. The performance of countries achieving scores of (a rounded) 8 and 12 (belonging to Groups Q2 and Q3 and the first three places in Group Q4) can be regarded as satisfying: however, there is much opportunity for further development in their case. The last six countries that obtained scores of less than or close to 7 can be expected to make the most efforts to improve the provision of a good life for their citizens as a material foundation of social futuring.
I.2.4. Balance
No Country SFI
1 Q1 Hungary 6.6
2 Slovak Republic 6.5
2 Portugal 6.5
4 Lithuania 6.4
5 Latvia 6.2
5 Norway 6.2
7 Slovenia 5.9
8 Poland 5.7
8 Czech Republic 5.7
8 Netherlands 5.7
11 Q2 Denmark 5.6
11 Canada 5.6
13 New Zealand 5.5
13 Austria 5.5
13 Israel 5.5
13 Estonia 5.5
17 Turkey 5.4
18 Germany 5.3
18 France 5.3
20 Q3 Belgium 5.2
20 Ireland 5.2
22 Korea 5.1
23 Finland 5.0
24 Chile 4.8
24 Spain 4.8
24 Japan 4.8
27 Luxembourg 4.7
28 Q4 Australia 4.6
28 Switzerland 4.6
28 Greece 4.6
31 Sweden 4.5
31 Mexico 4.5
33 United Kingdom 4.1
33 Iceland 4.1
35 Italy 4.0
36 United States 2.9
Figure 10:
Rankings of OECD countries based on the ”Balance” normative standard
0.0 4.0 6.0 10.0
46
Finally, the normative standard entitled Balance refers to real and perceived community states that are free from excessive social comparisons (such as envy) and reflects the importance of intergenerational commitments. The role of Balance as a normative standard is reflected in its 10% weight in constructing the SFI; it involves aspects of fertility and age-dependency, as well as social inequalities. As for its measurement, we identified one dimension we call Wellbeing &
Generativity.
Considering the ranking based on Balance, out of the maximum 10 points Hungary, the Slovak Republic, and Portugal – the top three countries – obtained scores of 6.6, 6.5, and 6.5 respectively. The lowest scores belong to the United Kingdom, Iceland, Italy, and the United States, receiving 4.1, 4.1, 4.0 and 2.9 scores respectively. Since differences between countries are marginal in the normative standard Balance, they can be classified into only two subgroups, depending on whether they achieve scores more or less than 5.0 points. The first group contains 23, while the second contains 13 countries. Countries belonging to the second group (with scores of under 5.0) can be expected to make more efforts to create a more balanced social order.
II. OECD countries’ overall SFI rankings grouped according